"Neo-con" defined.

[url=www.sierratimes.com/03/06/17/guestoped_jb.htm]Bush Presidency is Advancing the Progressive Agenda[/url]  

By John Bender  

Democrats may be worried that George Bush is unbeatable in 2004, but President Bush’s strength is good news for progressives. No president since LBJ has been as successful in expanding government and increasing the size and scope of social programs as this president.
Presidents Carter and Clinton didn’t even come close to matching President Bush’s accomplishments in expanding government social programs. George Bush increased government size and spending more in his first two years than Bill Clinton did in his first six years. By the end of this year, he will have expanded government more than Bill Clinton did in his entire eight-year administration.

To be fair, Bill Clinton had to fight the conservatives in Congress who threw up every roadblock they could muster to thwart his progressive agenda. George Bush has not only silenced the conservative wing of the Republican Party, he has ground them into pulp and made them toothless tigers.

There is no longer any serious talk about making government smaller or eliminating government departments or programs. Smaller government used to be the bedrock principal of the Republican Party. President Bush changed that and is pushing Republicans in Congress not just to accept bigger government, but to embrace it.

Instead of eliminating the Education Department, George Bush almost doubled its size and pushed through the largest increase in funding the department ever enjoyed. He and Ted Kennedy worked closely together to make sure that the federal government also has more power over local schools than ever before.

The testing mandated by the education bill, and the mandate that schools meet minimum standards is a brilliant maneuver that will demand the standards and the tests be controlled centrally from Washington. No one will be able to oppose national standards and a national testing system. Without national standards, testing is subjective and worthless. National standards and a standardized national test will require local schools teach to the test. That means Washington will be dictating the curriculum in every school in America. Bill Clinton and Al Gore couldn’t even dream of accomplishing this much progress.

In other areas President Bush also out performed President Clinton. He expanded other programs the Contract With America targeted for elimination. He expanded Americorps, the Peace Corps, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and Head Start.

Working closely with progressive Republicans and Democrats, George Bush passed the farm bill that dismantled the Freedom to Farm Act that conservative Republicans pushed through Congress, and President Clinton signed, in 1996. This new legislation boosts farm spending to record levels. President Bush’s farm bill not only increased old subsidies, it created new subsidies our farmers never had before. No Democrat president could have pushed this legislation through a Republican controlled Congress. The conservative wing of the party still holds some powerful positions in Congress, especially in the House. They were proud of the Freedom to Farm Act and would have fought tooth and nail with a Democrat president to keep it in place. They caved in to President Bush without even a hint of a fight. President Bush effectively cut the conservatives in Congress off at the knees on this legislation and on most of their domestic agenda. He rules the Republican Party with an iron fist and conservatives are unable to out maneuver him.

President Bush signed the Campaign Finance Reform bill into law. Conservative Republicans in Congress are still quietly seething about how he steamrollered them on this. President Bush is also leading the fight to expand Medicare, add prescription drug coverage and mandate mental health coverage. Conservatives kept Presidents Carter and Clinton from adding these entitlements to Medicare. With President Bush pushing the agenda, they aren’t even pretending to oppose these additions.

The president is also leading the fight to extend the child tax credit to low income families excluded from the latest tax cut. He figuratively bitch-slapped Tom Delay and his conservative cohorts who threatened to derail the expanded credit, urging the Republicans to pass the bill quickly and send it to him for his signature. While progressive Republicans like to claim President Bush is following President Reagan’s vision for America, he is actually following President Nixon’s agenda to the letter. President Nixon never tried to eliminate any government program or agency. He expanded government as much as he could. Few people remember that it was President Nixon who created the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the National Endowment for the Arts. Fewer still remember that it was President Nixon who tied Social Security benefits to the cost of living. President Bush is surpassing President Nixon in advancing progressive social policy.

President Bush is also making talk radio safe for progressives. Hosts who would have railed against President Clinton, or any Democrat, for pushing the progressive agenda President Bush is implementing, excuse this president for it. Many of them attack any conservative who calls to point out that President Bush is a progressive. Even Rush Limbaugh is leery of taking on this president. While he occasionally offers some mild criticism of the president, he always follows that criticism by offering excuses for the president’s actions and progressive domestic agenda. This is partially due to the attacks that come from the Bush cultists any time anyone is anything but worshipful of their guy. Like Democrats who refused to believe that President Clinton was capable of doing any wrong, there is a group of Republicans who would support President Bush no matter how far left he governs. They attack anyone and any group who points out that President Bush is not conservative. Many of these people are domestic progressives who like big government and benefit from government programs. They call themselves conservatives; many of them really think they are conservatives. In fact, they support progressive social programs and most benefit from them. They are critical of the poor who receive government help, but enjoy generous government subsidies of their own lifestyles. Many talk show hosts fall into this category themselves.

The other reason even real conservatives are leery of voicing anything except the mildest criticism of President Bush is they fear retaliation from the administration. They fear being cut off from the information loop. They fear being dropped from the administration’s fax and E-mail grapevine. Their professional status is greatly enhanced by access to administration sources and President Bush is not shy about diminishing or eliminating that access for anyone who puts their principals ahead of support for his agenda.

All things considered, progressives are much better off with President Bush in office than they would be with any of his Democrat challengers. No Democrat on the scene today can come close to matching President Bush’s ability to advance the progressive agenda and marginalize the conservatives in the Republican Party. Four more years of a Bush administration will produce progressive gains that are only matched by FDR’s accomplishments. Rather than being disappointed that they don’t have a Democrat in the presidency, progressives should be thankful they have an ideological soul mate in office. For progressives the cry should be “FOUR MORE YEARS!”

And what is your take on all this?

I find no faults in the article as it accurately describes the present situation.

Oh well, it could (and will) get worse.

Please turn on the TV.  Everything will be OK.  

Maybe some pro sports would be good.

This lends credence to my assertion that both major parties will only expand our unconstitutionally large gov't.

"On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The
people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd", said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did", said Ford. "It is."
"So", said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "Why
don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them", said Ford. "They've all got the
vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted
in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually *vote* for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard
might get in. Got any gin?"

   Douglas Adams, from "So Long, and Thanks for All The Fish"

Imbroglio, you remind me of an old story...

There was a hippie (remember them?) that sat around playing the same cord on his guitar over and over and over, all day long.

Finally, someone asked him, "Man, don't you know any other cords?"

He replied, "Man, they're all looking for it.  I've found it."

[b]"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a Democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependency back again into bondage."[/b]- Alexander Fraser Tyler

Tweedely-dee?? Or Tweedely-dum for president!!

Looks like we are gonna hafta send ANOTHER message to the repubs, like we did in the early 90's.

One of these days, people will be so disgusted, a Constitutionalist will win...

If there is still a Republic left that is...

Liberty I am afraid the party is over....and I will vote for Hillary in 2004

And you will do this because???
If it's in some idiotic hope that this will "hasten the revolution" then you are perhaps the biggest sucker I've ever encountered.

blah blah blah, same old same old

I will agree that there's massive confusion (and mis-education) in the general populace about whether we have a republic or a democracy.  To me it's a critical point to our survival.  If it's kicked under the bed or shoved in a closet too many more times we will have "mobocracy".

Oh goody rikky is here....are you and Cincin taking turns on me today? No it is not for the revolution. Do you have any idea how hard it is to not call you and your republican apologists brethren the names that are coming to my mind?
Leave me alone and go and play with Falwell or Kennedy. I want a democrat in office so we get gridlock. Is that simple enough for you or do you want to give another trillions dollars to the NEA for a picture of someone pissing on the cross? You republicans have forgotten yesterday and are drooling to bankrupt this contry morally and financially because you are in charge...and you are worse that the deomcrats ever were......

Why "to send a message" of course! [rolleyes] SOME of these 3rd Party types who vote for Harry Browne or Ross Perot don't have the cajones to just vote for the Hildebeast once and for all. So they play their little game of self-denial and vote for a nobody thinking they're "sending a message" when if they were really true to their intention, they would just go ahead and vote for the worst Democrat socialist out there because that's who wins when they vote for Perot or Browne anyway.

Wouldn't just voting for the Hildebeast also "send a message" just like voting for Perot supposedly sent a message by causing Swill Klinton to be elected?

By the way, Perot is a rabid gun-grabber and everyone knew it long before the '92 election. Well, ALMOST everyone. At least those who were paying attention! [;D]

Sounds like wishful thinking.



You mean gridlock like in 94?  

Some guys will continue to mindlessly support the national Republican party, regardless of the evidence which suggests that the party is embodying many of the same ideas of big government as Democrats.

They should live in an "enlightened" state as NY, where the political party delineations are damned blurry. Gotta love those moderate Republicans.

Imbroglio may be a one-trick pony, but it is a pretty damned important trick.

Here comes the "you tin-foil/TEOTHWAWKI guys are nuts" song and dance from the usual suspects...

no buddy I want absolute government shutdown, I want spit ball fight in the halls of congress, I want them so busy fighting each other that they totally forget about the rest of us. Isn't that a good idea?

Sure.  It's only happened once, for about a year and change during the Clinton impeachment.  Don't count on it happening again.

There's your problem right there...same problem as Californians and most Democratic national candidates.  You think the entire US is California and NYC.



Mental masturbation is important?

I have neither the time nor the patience to expound on this subject right now. Suffice to say, however, I am disappointed over the lack of Repulican voices calling for smaller gov't and fiscal/social conservatism.

1995 was our Waterloo.

I think there are plenty of Republican voices calling for social conservatism, including the ones in the White House.  FISCAL conservatism...well, that's a bit hard to sell right now.

Advancing the Progressive Agenda?  Nearing the election!   Canoeing the cascading electoral pools?   This is not a Democracy this is a Republic,that's why each state differs in all it's legislation!

 Imbroglio buddy you got to get a grip man,post something that is you!  Original not contrived by the powers that be to you!

 Bob [:D]